In his statement that cyclists are bound by the law, he is absolutely correct. There is a certain type of cyclist that assumes the laws do not apply to them. The same types that liberally claim that all motorists are murdering bastards – or will use the classic tu quoque that there are more law breaking motorists than there are law breaking cyclists. Frankly, I am not interested. I expect every road user to abide by the law – cyclists included and I have little patience with the Lycra clad warriors who adopt a superior holier than thou attitude.
However, the Groan, being the Groan has to try to make political capital.
Mayor appears to blame spate of fatal incidents on ‘very risky’ behaviour by cyclists, such as jumping red lights
Well, well, well. While none of us can pre-empt the outcome of the latest death, pointing out that people breaking laws may well be engaging in risky behaviour is a fair point to make. And, if you look at what he said, he has clarified his remarks, so they are clear as a mountain brook to anyone who can comprehend English. It is not the same thing as blaming victims at all and Johnson is making no attempt to do so. What the Groan is doing is engaging in a classic straw man. But, then, the Guardian has enough straw men in its pages to apply for a CAP subsidy…
Sits back and waits for the inevitable irritated cycling lobby to descend…
It’s okay, I’ve got my popcorn ready.
“While none of us can pre-empt the outcome of the latest death…”
It’s telling, though, is it not, that no-one has been arrested? In an age when the police arrest at the drop of a hat, that tells us something…
Indeed. it looks as if it was obvious at first glance that the bus driver was not to blame – or had not committed an offence, otherwise he’d have been arrested and DNA tested.
How come when there are continual calls to ban anything that is remotely dangerous that cycling gets a free pass? Actually a plus-pass, because everyone else has to take responsibility for their safety.
If it is desirable to encourage physical activity then let that activity be walking, something open to far more people than cycling will ever be.
As a sometime pedestrian I’m finding it increasingly harder to cross a road safely. I can hear cars coming and invariably they keep away from the kerb. Not so our cycling friends who are exactly where one might take a false step. Don’t get me started on the 10 mph pavement riders or the ones that do 2 mph in a bus lane or 40 mph downhill, oblivious, like police drivers, to the Laws of Newton.
The bicycle, like the horse, has had its day on the road, let’s stop pretending otherwise.
I dislike cyclists intensely, I don’t drive but I am a pedestrian. Cyclists moan about drivers, but they are quick enough to hog the pavements and run over the pedestrians. A couple of months back my partner was nearly hit by a cyclist riding on the pavement against traffic flow downhill at excessive speed, (please remember this is a man who just 2 years ago this month broke his spine, he shouted at this lad, older than 18 under 25, as it happened we were right outside a local police station and 2 officers were just going into the station, they came over and tried to arrest my partner for being abusive to the Cyclist.
My jaw hit the floor. “umm excuse me officer” said I “IS IT OR IS IT NOT ILLEGAL TO RIDE ON THE PAVEMENT”
“yes madam it is, but this is a very busy road and…..” “WHAT SORRY officer?” “so let me get this straight the cyclist IS NOT AT FAULT”
They seemed a smidge perturbed as I sent George off to stand away because he was getting very upset and edgy.
I explained that actually he broke his spine and the cyclist had scared the living crap out of him by nearly mowing him down, I explained that despite there pish it was actually illegal to ride on the pavement and I explained we were now leaving and that they really should have a word with their sargent about their approach to the legality of riding on the pavements. Every day we walk somewhere and everyday we take our life in our hands as cyclist assume they can take over the pavements WHICH ARE MEANT FOR PEDESTRIANS.Ergo why I don’t like cyclists. arrogant and dangerous.
My pet peeve is cyclists who cycle on our local dual carriageways ignoring the separated cycle path that is running right alongside it.
Not to mention those who insist on trying to bring a wet muddy bicycle onto an overcrowded two-car commuter train – and accuse anyone who demurs of selfishness.
“Smug arrogance” doesn’t begin to describe it, in many cases.
I always find that baffling.
There is no requirement to use a cycle lane and I cant imagine a scenario round here where a rider might choose not to, but I have seen some really badly designed cycle lanes that deposit the cyclist in strange places, or have bus stops in them, that might mean someone with ‘local knowledge’ would avoid them.
Some of the city centre ones are pretty bizarre. However, on the ring road, there is no need to use the dual carriageway as the separated cycle lane is well designed and safe.
Kath, interesting retort from the police about swearing that I also was on the receiving end of – albeit I was a cyclist….
Cycling up to a traffic light controlled junction to turn right with a cycle path clearly marked in the road for both lanes as they approach the lights. So a vehicle turning left will need to cross the ‘going right’ cycle lane. Not much traffic about but a couple of cars in the right lane and a couple of pretend coppers (PCSO’s) on bicycles in the bicycle stop area on the left. A driver in a new Mini thinks it appropriate to go beside me as I am approaching the junction and move left – effectively squashing me into the left lane!
I end up behind the two PCSO’s and am a bit annoyed and shouted at the driver something along the lines of ‘What do you think you are you doing you fucking twat?” Only for the useless wastes of taxpayers money to turn on me and tell me not to swear! Apparently they don’t care about drivers who behave like arrogant bastards even when they are on bicycles too.
Turns out they don’t arrest you for calling them ‘pointless wastes of space’ though. 😉
“Ergo why I don’t like cyclists. arrogant and dangerous.”
I’d add policemen to that list, if I were you!
I cycle a fair bit and do so legally and with consideration to other travellers. During the summer I often do my 12 mile journey to and from work by cycle. I do so without endangering myself or anyone else. I feel that some commenters should qualify their remarks by saying ‘some cyclists’, we are not all Kamikazi pilots.
I have to say that I agree with the OP though. The cycling lobby seem to always be of the opinion that cyclists generally are whiter than white and always the victim of careless drivers. We all know that that isn’t true.
Idiots riding without lights has come up as a subject recently as well. There really is no excuse when you can buy a lighting set, complete with batteries for four quid and fit it in five minutes. You don’t even have the problem of having to constantly change the batteries because the LED ones use so little power. Spend a little bit more money and you can have rechargeable ones that are pretty awesome.
I nearly had a cyclist under the wheels of the car a year or so back. I was going in for my night shift at Sainsburys. It was dark – being half eleven at night and this cyclist – sans lights and dressed all in dark clothing – comes off the far pavement and shoots across the road as I was turning left at a mini roundabout. It was the movement in the shadows that caught my peripheral vision that saved him. He was an arsehole. Yet had I hit him, I would have been the one to blame, no doubt. He survived that night because I am an experienced driver and motorcyclist with eyes in the back of my head – in other words, despite his own carelessness and arrogance and indifference to the law and his own safety, he was relying on my superior skills to keep him alive. He got lucky that night.
“…this cyclist – sans lights and dressed all in dark clothing ..”
I see your cyclist dressed in dark clothing with no lights, and raise you an African cyclist dressed all in dark clothing with no lights!
Of course Boris is such a good example http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-565882/Caught-camera-The-film-shows-Boris-Johnson-cycling-red-lights-failing-stop-zebra-crossing-AND-mounting-pavement.html plus no lights a week or so ago and previous use of mobile phone whilst riding, which at the time he considered not a problem ?
Shrugs. The man is a politician, I expect him to be a hypocrite. It doesn’t mean that what he is saying here is wrong, because it isn’t.
Quite right, but it hardly helps the”cause” if you are splashed all over the front pages as he was last week and then exhort everyone else to do otherwise.
The problem with cyclists and all other road users that intentionally break the law is that they in the main can, simply because they do it all the time and are rarely if ever caught, hence mobile phone usage is still rife, weekend motorcyclists come through my road (a 20 limit ) at anything up to approaching 70 just to show they can and much else.
Traffic police are now almost non existent, cameras where they did have a use are removed and people know they basically can take the p…
Which is an argument against the plethora of laws. They are unenforceable. Better to have stiff penalties in the event of a collision caused by such behaviour using perfectly usable existing legislation.
So what your saying is if someone is maimed or killed punish those that are at fault because the system can’t prevent that happening,unless of course you are one of those who suffers because that usable legislation is not enforced at a primary level, the usable legislation is rarely used now.
I find it difficult to believe you can defend those that come from the “I will do want I want” brigade until ‘there is a collision’, it’s bit late then don’t you think !
Me, I don’t want a plethora of legislation that is unenforceable, but I would like to see the ridiculous driving, riding, clamped down on before there is a ‘collision’, you are a professional road user and you believe because the system can’t or won’t cope, hit those hard after the damage has been done is the answer rather than change – if possible – the system to a preemptive mode ?